Milestones: 1750–1775 - Office of the Historian Milestones: 1750–1775 Treaty of Paris, 1763 The Treaty of Paris of 1763 ended the French and Indian War/Seven Years’ War between Great Britain and France, as well as their respective allies. In the terms of the treaty, France gave up all its territories in mainland North America, effectively ending any foreign military threat to the British colonies there. The Treaty of Paris, 1763 During the war, British forces had scored important overseas victories against France: not only had the British conquered French Canada, they also won victories in India, and captured French island colonies in the Caribbean. In March of 1762, French King Louis XV issued a formal call for peace talks. The British Government was also interested in ending the war. The Seven Years’ War had been enormously expensive, and the Government had to finance the war with debt. Creditors were beginning to doubt Great Britain’s ability to pay back the loans it had floated on financial markets.

In addition, British King George II had died in 1760, and his successor George III was more amenable to ending the war. Initial attempts at negotiating a peace settlement failed, and instead French and Spanish diplomats signed the Family Compact, a treaty that brought Spain into the war against Britain. British Prime Minister Lord Bute continued secret and informal talks with French diplomat Étienne-François de Stainville, duc de Choiseul, and they came to an unofficial agreement in June, 1762. Bute promised fairly generous terms, and the two countries agreed to an exchange of ambassadors in September. By the time the formal negotiations began, the situation had changed. News had reached Europe of the British capture of Havana, and with it the Spanish colony of Cuba. Spanish King Charles III refused to agree to a treaty that would require Spain to cede Cuba, but the British Parliament would never ratify a treaty that did not reflect British territorial gains made during the war. Facing this dilemma, French negotiator Choiseul proposed a solution that redistributed American territory between France, Spain and Great Britain.

Under Choiseul’s plan, Britain would gain all French territory east of the Mississippi, while Spain would retain Cuba in exchange for handing Florida over to Great Britain. French territories west of the Mississippi would become Spanish, along with the port of New Orleans. In return for these cessions, along with territory in India, Africa, and the Mediterranean island of Minorca, France would regain the Caribbean islands that British forces had captured during the war. The British Government also promised to allow French Canadians to freely practice Catholicism and provided for French fishing rights off Newfoundland. French diplomat Étienne-François de Stainville, duc de Choiseul Choiseul preferred to keep the small Caribbean islands of Martinique, Guadeloupe, and St. Lucia rather than hold on to the vast territory stretching from Louisiana to Canada. This decision was motivated by the fact that the islands’ sugar industry was enormously profitable. In contrast, Canada had been a drain on the French treasury. The loss of Canada, while lamentable to French officials, made sense from a mercantile perspective. The diplomats completed their negotiations and signed the preliminary Treaty of Paris on November 3, 1762.

Spanish and French negotiators also signed the Treaty of San Ildefonso at the same time, which confirmed the cession of French Louisiana to Spain. Although British King George III and his ministers were in favor of the treaty, it was unpopular with the British public. However, the treaty contained enough concessions to war hawks that the British Parliament ratified the Treaty of Paris by a majority of 319 to 64, and the treaty went into effect on February 10, 1763. For Anglo-American colonists, the treaty was a theoretical success. By confirming the conquest of Canada and extending British possessions to the Mississippi, the colonists no longer had to worry about the threat of a French invasion. For the American Indians in what had been frontier territory, the treaty proved disastrous. They could no longer pursue what had been a largely effective strategy of playing the French and British against each other to extract the most favorable terms of alliance and preserve their lands against encroachment by Anglo-American colonists. Despite what seemed like a success, the Treaty of Paris ultimately encouraged dissension between Anglo-American colonists and the British Government because their interests in North America no longer coincided.

The British Government no longer wanted to maintain an expensive military presence, and its attempts to manage a post-treaty frontier policy that would balance colonists’ and Indians’ interests would prove ineffective and even counterproductive. Coupled with differences between the imperial government and colonists on how to levy taxes to pay for debts on wartime expenses, the Treaty of Paris ultimately set the colonists on the path towards seeking independence, even as it seemed to make the British Empire stronger than ever. (see Parliamentary Taxation of Colonies) Treaty of Paris 1763 - The Canadian Encyclopedia email MLA 7th Edition Cornelius J. Jaenen "Treaty of Paris 1763" The Canadian Encyclopedia. Eds. Jon Tattrie. Toronto: Historica Canada, 2013. Web. 15 Jan. 2017. Cornelius J. Jaenen "Treaty of Paris 1763" The Canadian Encyclopedia. Eds. Jon Tattrie. Toronto: Historica Canada, 2013. Web. 15 Jan. 2017. APA 6th Edition Cornelius J. Jaenen, R. The Canadian Encyclopedia. (2013).

Treaty of Paris 1763. Retrieved January 15, 2017, from Cornelius J. Jaenen, R. The Canadian Encyclopedia. (2013). Treaty of Paris 1763. Retrieved January 15, 2017, from Chicago 16th Edition Cornelius J. Jaenen. "Treaty of Paris 1763" In The Canadian Encyclopedia. Historica Canada, 1985–. Article published August 6, 2013. Cornelius J. Jaenen. "Treaty of Paris 1763" In The Canadian Encyclopedia. Historica Canada, 1985–. Article published August 6, 2013. Turabian Cornelius J. Jaenen. 2013. Treaty of Paris 1763. The Canadian Encyclopedia (accessed January 15, 2017). Cornelius J. Jaenen. 2013. Treaty of Paris 1763. The Canadian Encyclopedia (accessed January 15, 2017).

While every effort has been made to follow citation style rules, there may be some discrepancies. Please refer to the appropriate style manual or other sources if you have any questions. Updates? Omissions? Article suggestions? We want to hear from you! History Treaty of Paris 1763 The Treaty of Paris ended the Seven Years’ War between France, Britain and Spain. It marked the end of that phase of European conflict in North America, and created the basis for the modern country of Canada. Treaty of Paris (1763) The Treaty of Paris ended the Seven Years’ War between France, Britain and Spain. It marked the end of that phase of European conflict in North America, and created the basis for the modern country of Canada. The Seven Years' War The Seven Years’ War was fought from 1756-63. The first war to span the globe, it was chiefly fought between Britain, Prussia and Hanover, against France, Austria, Sweden, Saxony, Russia and Spain. France and Britain were especially hostile enemies, waging war on land and sea in Europe and in colonies around the world.

Britain hoped to destroy France’s navy and merchant fleet, take possession of its colonies and remove France as a commercial rival. Much of the fighting took place in North America, where the European powers clashed over possession of their colonies. The North American theatre is also known as the French and Indian War. Dividing the Colonies The Treaty of Paris was signed on 10 February 1763 by France, Britain and Spain. Three years earlier, Governor Pierre de Rigaud de Vaudreuil de Cavagnial, Marquis de Vaudreuil , surrendered New France (what is now Quebec, and other French territories in North America) to a British invasion force at Montréal by the Articles of Capitulation on 8 September 1760. Prior to this the Aboriginal allies of the French had reached an agreement with the British at Oswegatchie (25 August) and the Huron of Lorette had done likewise at Longueuil (5 September). New France was under military occupation and military rule until a definitive treaty of peace was negotiated.

By the terms of the treaty, Britain obtained the French possessions of Ile Royale ( Cape Breton Island ), Canada ( Quebec ), and the Great Lakes Basin and the east bank of the Mississippi River. Britain received Florida from Spain. France retained fishing rights in Newfoundland and the Gulf of St Lawrence , acquired the small Gulf islands of Saint Pierre and Miquelon as an unfortified fishing station, and had her lucrative West Indian possessions, trading centres in India and slaving station on the Île de Gorée (in present-day Senegal) restored. In accordance with the conditional capitulation of 1760, Britain guaranteed French Canadians limited freedom of worship. Provisions were made for exchange of prisoners; French Canadians were given 18 months to emigrate if they wished; and government archives were preserved. Britain had acquired a large empire and France was still able to challenge British naval supremacy, but Spain achieved none of her war aims. Britain would later lose the southern North American colonies in the American Revolution . The northern colonies would become the modern country of Canada.

Treaty of Paris (1763) | Military Wiki | Fandom powered by Wikia Treaty of Paris (1763) Treaty of Paris (1763) The participants of the Seven Years' War as shown before the outbreak of war in the mid-1750s. Great Britain, Prussia, Portugal, with allies France, Spain, Austria, Russia, with allies Context End of the Seven Years' War (known as the French and Indian War in North America) Signed See also: Treaty of Hubertusburg (1763) The Treaty of Paris, also known as the Peace of Paris and the Treaty of 1763, was signed on 10 February 1763 by the kingdoms of Great Britain, France and Spain, with Portugal in agreement, after Britain's victory over France and Spain during the Seven Years' War . The signing of the treaty formally ended the Seven Years' War, otherwise known as the French and Indian War in the North American theatre, [1] which marked the beginning of an era of British dominance outside Europe.

[2] The treaty did not involve Prussia and Austria as they signed a separate agreement, the Treaty of Hubertusburg , five days later. Contents Edit During the war, Britain had conquered the French colonies of Canada , Guadeloupe, Martinique, Saint Lucia, Dominica, Grenada, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines , and Tobago, the French "factories" (trading posts) in India, the slave-trading station at Gorée , the Sénégal River and its settlements, and the Spanish colonies of Manila (in the Philippines) and Havana (in Cuba). France had captured Minorca and British trading posts in Sumatra, while Spain had captured the border fortress of Almeida in Portugal, and Colonia del Sacramento in South America. In the treaty, most of these territories were restored to their original owners. Britain however made considerable gains. [3] France and Spain restored all their conquests to Britain and Portugal. Britain restored Manila and Havana to Spain, and Guadeloupe, Martinique, Saint Lucia, Gorée, and the Indian factories to France.

[4] In return, France ceded Canada, Dominica, Grenada, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, and Tobago to Britain. France also ceded the eastern half of French Louisiana]] to Britain; that is, the area from the Mississippi River to the Appalachian Mountains. [5] Spain ceded Florida to Britain. [4] France had already secretly given Louisiana to Spain in the Treaty of Fontainebleau (1762) . In addition, while France regained its factories in India, France recognized British clients as the rulers of key Indian native states, and pledged not to send troops to Bengal. Britain agreed to demolish its fortifications in British Honduras (now Belize), but retained a logwood-cutting colony there. Britain confirmed the right of its new subjects to practice the Catholic religion. [6] France ceded all of its territory in mainland North America, but retained fishing rights off Newfoundland and the two small islands of Saint Pierre and Miquelon , where it could dry that fish. In turn France gained the return of its sugar colony, Guadeloupe, which it considered more valuable than Canada. [7] Louisiana question Edit The Treaty of Paris is frequently noted as the point at which France gave Louisiana to Spain.

However the transfer actually occurred in the Treaty of Fontainebleau (1762) but was not publicly announced until 1764. The Treaty of Paris was to give Britain the east side of the Mississippi (including Baton Rouge, Louisiana, which was to be part of the British territory of West Florida). New Orleans on the east side remained in French hands (albeit temporarily). The Mississippi River corridor in what is modern day Louisiana was to be reunited following the Louisiana Purchase in 1803 and the Adams–Onís Treaty in 1819. The 1763 treaty states in Article VII: VII.

French territories on the continent of America; it is agreed, that, for the future, the confines between the dominions of his Britannick Majesty and those of his Most Christian Majesty, in that part of the world, shall be fixed irrevocably by a line drawn along the middle of the River Mississippi, from its source to the river Iberville, and from thence, by a line drawn along the middle of this river, and the lakes Maurepas and Pontchartrain to the sea; and for this purpose, the Most Christian King cedes in full right, and guaranties to his Britannick Majesty the river and port of the Mobile, and everything which he possesses, or ought to possess, on the left side of the river Mississippi, except the town of New Orleans and the island in which it is situated, which shall remain to France, provided that the navigation of the river Mississippi shall be equally free, as well to the subjects of Great Britain as to those of France, in its whole breadth and length, from its source to the sea, and expressly that part which is between the said island of New Orleans and the right bank of that river, as well as the passage both in and out of its mouth: It is farther stipulated,

 that the vessels belonging to the subjects of either nation shall not be stopped, visited, or subjected to the payment of any duty whatsoever.

The stipulations inserted in the IVth article, in favour of the inhabitants of Canada shall also take place with regard to the inhabitants of the countries ceded by this article. Canada question Edit While the war was fought all over the world, the British began the war over French possessions in North America. [8] It was acceptable to return the French economically powerful sugar islands for the defense of the American colonies. [9] Also, while the war weakened France, France was still a European Power . British Prime Minister Lord Bute wanted a peace that would not aggravate France towards a second war. [10] This explains why Britain agreed to return so much while being in such a strong position. Though the Protestant British feared Roman Catholics, Britain did not want to antagonize France through expulsion or forced conversion. On the other hand, Britain did not want French settlers to leave Canada to strengthen other French settlements in North America. [11] This explains Britain’s willingness to protect Roman Catholics living in Canada. French perspective Edit Unlike Lord Bute, the French Foreign Minister the Duke of Choiseul expected a return to war. However, France needed peace to rebuild.

[12] French diplomats believed that without France to keep the Americans in check, the colonists might attempt to revolt. [9] In Canada, France wanted open emigration for those who would not swear allegiance to the British Crown such as nobility. [13] Lastly, France required protection for Roman Catholics in North America considering Britain’s ill attitudes towards Roman Catholics. Canada in the Treaty of Paris Edit The article states: IV. His Most Christian Majesty renounces all pretensions which he has heretofore formed or might have formed to Nova Scotia or Acadia in all its parts, and guaranties the whole of it, and with all its dependencies, to the King of Great Britain: Moreover, his Most Christian Majesty cedes and guaranties to his said Britannick Majesty, in full right, Canada, with all its dependencies, as well as the island of Cape Breton, and all the other islands and coasts in the gulph and river of St.

Lawrence, and in general, every thing that depends on the said countries, lands, islands, and coasts, with the sovereignty, property, possession, and all rights acquired by treaty, or otherwise, which the Most Christian King and the Crown of France have had till now over the said countries, lands, islands, places, coasts, and their inhabitants, so that the Most Christian King cedes and makes over the whole to the said King, and to the Crown of Great Britain, and that in the most ample manner and form, without restriction, and without any liberty to depart from the said cession and guaranty under any pretence, or to disturb Great Britain in the possessions above mentioned. His Britannick Majesty, on his side, agrees to grant the liberty of the Catholick religion to the inhabitants of Canada: he will, in consequence, give the most precise and most effectual orders, that his new Roman Catholic subjects may profess the worship of their religion according to the rites of the Romish church, as far as the laws of Great Britain permit.

His Britannick Majesty farther agrees, that the French inhabitants, or others who had been subjects of the Most Christian King in Canada, may retire with all safety and freedom wherever they shall think proper, and may sell their estates, provided it be to the subjects of his Britannick Majesty, and bring away their effects as well as their persons, without being restrained in their emigration, under any pretence whatsoever, except that of debts or of criminal prosecutions: The term limited for this emigration shall be fixed to the space of eighteen months, to be computed from the day of the exchange of the ratification of the present treaty. Dunkirk question Edit During the negotiations that led to the treaty, a major issue of dispute between Britain and France had been over the status of the fortifications of the French coastal settlement of Dunkirk. The British had long feared that it would be used as a staging post to launch a French invasion of Britain . Under the Treaty of Utrecht in 1713 they had forced France to concede extreme limits on the fortifications there. The 1748 Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle had allowed more generous terms, [14] and France had constructed greater defences for the town.

By the Treaty Britain forced France to accept the earlier 1713 conditions and demolish the fortifications they had constructed since then. [15] This would be a continuing source of resentment to France, who would eventually have this clause overturned in the Treaty of Paris (1783) which brought an end to the American Revolutionary War . Reaction Edit When Lord Bute became Prime Minister in 1762, he pushed for a resolution to the war with France and Spain, fearing that Great Britain could not govern all of its newly acquired territories. In what Winston Churchill would later term a policy of "appeasement," Bute returned some colonies to Spain and France in the negotiations. Despite a desire for peace, many in the British parliament opposed the return of any gains made during the war. Notable among the opposition was former Prime Minister William Pitt, the Elder , who warned that the terms of the treaty would only lead to further conflicts once France and Spain had time to rebuild. "The peace was insecure," he would later say, "because it restored the enemy to her former greatness.

The peace was inadequate, because the places gained were no equivalent for the places surrendered." [16] Members of Parliament known to oppose the treaty were dismissed from offices, until it was certain to pass. When the treaty was approved in Great Britain, it passed 319 votes to 65 opposed. [17] The Treaty of Paris took no consideration of Great Britain's battered continental ally, Frederick II of Prussia . Frederick would have to negotiate peace terms separately in the Treaty of Hubertusburg. For decades following the Seven Years' War, Frederick II would consider the Treaty of Paris as a British betrayal. The American colonists were disappointed by the protection of Roman Catholicism in the Treaty of Paris because of their own strong Protestant faith. [18] Some have pointed to this as one reason for the breakdown of American–British relations. [18] Effects on French Canada Edit The article provided for unrestrained emigration for 18 months from Canada. However, passage of British ships was expensive. [13] A total of 1600 people left New France through the Treaty clause, but only 270 French-Canadians.

[13] Some have claimed that this was part of British policy to limit emigration. [13] Article IV of the treaty allowed Roman Catholicism to be practiced in Canada. [19] George III agreed to allow Catholicism within the laws of Great Britain. In this period, British laws included various Test Acts to prevent governmental, judicial, and bureaucratic appointments from going to Roman Catholics. Roman Catholics were believed to be agents of the Jacobite Pretenders to the throne, who normally resided in France supported by the French regime. [20] This was relaxed in Quebec to some degree, but top positions like governorships were still held by Anglicans. [19] Article IV has also been cited as the basis for Quebec often having its unique set of laws that are different from the rest of Canada. There was a general constitutional principle in the United Kingdom to allow colonies taken through conquest to continue their own laws. [21] This was limited by royal prerogative , and the monarch could still choose to change the accepted laws in a conquered colony. [21] However, the treaty eliminated this power because by a different constitutional principle, terms of a treaty were considered paramount.

[21] In practice, Roman Catholics could become jurors in inferior courts in Quebec and argue based on principles of French law. [22] However, the judge was British and his opinion on French law could be limited or hostile. [22] If the case was appealed to a superior court, neither French law nor Roman Catholic jurors were allowed. [23] Many French residents of what are now Canada's Maritime provinces, called Acadians, were deported during the Great Expulsion (1755–63). After the signing of the peace treaty guaranteed some rights to Roman Catholics, some Acadians returned to Canada. However, they were no longer welcome in English Nova Scotia. [24] They were forced into New Brunswick, which is a bilingual province today as a result of that relocation. [25] The French people of Quebec felt great betrayal at the French concession. Commander-in-Chief of the British Jeffrey Amherst noted that, “Many of the Canadians consider their Colony to be of utmost consequence to France & cannot be convinced ... that their Country has been conceded to Great Britain”. [26] See also Thoughts On Why France Ceded Louisiana To Spain After Seven Years War?

(Great Britain, Mexico) - History -U.S. and World, studying past, wars, presidents, language, economy - City-Data Forum Thoughts On Why France Ceded Louisiana To Spain After Seven Years War? (Great Britain, Mexico) User Name [ Register ] Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account , you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads. View detailed profile ( Advanced ) or search site with 13,141 posts, read 32,896,380 times Reputation: 11947 Advertisements Maybe someone can answer this and that is why did France cede French Louisiana over to Spain in 1763 when they both were losing allies along with Austria, Russia and Sweden against Great Britain, Prussia, Portugal during the Seven Years War (1756-1763). Infact Spain itself lost territory (Florida) over to Great Britain after the war and so i'm perplexed on this one?

14,588 posts, read 29,031,195 times Reputation: 13679 When France was attempting to get Spain to join in the war against Britain they offered Spain the "country of Louisianna" in exchange for their support. Spain did not initially accept since what constituted Louisianna was rather vague. Eventually Britain learned of the "Family Compact" (both France and Spain were ruled by members of the Bourbon family), that was an unspoken alliance between France and Spain, so Britain declared war on Spain. In 1762 following the Battle of Signal Hill which ended French control of Canada, the Spanish and French signed the secret Treaty of Fountainebleua. In it France agreed to cede to Spain the whole of the "country of Louisianna and city of New Orleans". At the time this covered the entirety of the Mississippi Valley from the Appalchians to the Rockies. The French offered them this as a way to "sweeten the bitter pill of defeat" and persuade Spain to not continue the war. The Spanish accepted the deal as it would unite their possessions and give them control of the entire Gulf of Mexico.

At the Treaty of Paris in 1763, the early treaty ceding Louisianna to Spain was kept secret. The fear was that Britain would attempt to assert a greater claim or use force of arms to extend their claims. France and Britain agreed that Louisianna was to be divided into western and eastern sections based on the Mississippi River. Britain gained everything to the east and France (secretly Spain) would retain everything to the west, including New Orleans. Spain agreed to cede Florida to Britain primarily because they had already been compensated with 'western' Louisianna per their earlier treaty with France. Following the war, Spain controlled in name, all of known North America west of the Mississippi and Britain controlled everything east of the Mississippi. French possessions in the "New World" were reduced to their primary sugar colonies in the Caribbean. Intro - Journal of John Bartram Journal of John Bartram In the winter of 1765-66 a sixty-six year old Quaker from Pennsylvania named John Bartram, accompanied by his son William Bartram, traveled in a dugout canoe to explore East Florida's most important waterway, the St. Johns River.

East and West Florida had become British colonies only two years before, after Spain ceded Florida to Britain at the Treaty of Paris that ended the Seven Years War. Little was known in Britain about these new colonies in 1763; Florida had not prospered under Spanish governance, and soon after the British flag was raised over the Castillo de San Marcos in St. Augustine, the capital of East Florida, 3,500 Spaniards departed for Cuba. Only three Spanish families remained, and no European settlements could be found outside the town walls in the vast, empty, and mostly uncharted wilderness that Governor James Grant characterized as a "New World in a State of Nature" soon after he arrived in 1764. But in London the new British province soon became the subject of great fascination and speculation. Potential investors anxious to people the new colony and exploit its resources clamored for maps and evidence of the qualilty of the soil and water. King George III therefore appointed a royal botanist to explore East and West Florida and report back to London. The man selected was John Bartram, a respected naturalist who had traveled widely in the New England colonies.

In April 1765 King George III awarded Bartram a stipend as a royal botanist with the expectation that he would explore Britain's new Florida provinces. Bartram's friend and patron, the London merchant Peter Collinson, had arranged the royal appointment and promised to provide financial assistance for a journey of exploration in Florida. Collinson recognized that Bartram would need assistance traveling through an uncharted wilderness, and urged him to take along his twenty-six year old son, William Bartram. Collinson regarded William as "a very ingenious young man" with "a general knowledge in natural things" and a special talent as a nature artist. William, living in North Carolina at the time, immediately expressed his "great desire in Going with thee...to be a help and Comfort to thee in what Ever afflictions or trouble thee should meet within thy long and tedious Jurney." John joined his son in North Carolina on August 6, 1765, and the two men headed for East Florida on horseback, stopping in South Carolina and Georgia along the way to collect plant specimens to ship to Collinson. They observed enslaved Africans at work, and sketched flowers, plants, and birds.

When in the countryside, they rode through the heat of day and sometimes slept in corn cribs or in forests tormented by mosquitoes. They arrived in St. Augustine late in the afternoon of October 11th. John, suffering from malarial fever, recuperated in his room for most of the next month, but was able to ride to Fort Picolata to observe treaty negotiations between British officials and leaders of the Creek and Seminole Indians. After returning to St. Augustine, John was again confined to his room, still suffering from malarial fever. On December 19th, after repeated urging by Governor Grant, the Bartrams began exploring the St. Johns River. They did not return until February 13, 1766, after nearly eight weeks of dangerous and exhausting travel. They had investigated the shores of the St. Johns from its merger with the Atlantic Ocean to lakes Ruth and Loughman on the south, near what they mistakenly assumed to be the river's headwaters. In all, they had covered a distance of more than 500 miles.

Along the way John measured and judged the quality of the soil, plants and trees and recorded his thoughts in a daily diary, while William filled sketch pads with his observations. Back in St. Augustine, Governor Grant provided a room for Bartram to convert his diary entries into a travel journal and to draw a corresponding map to guide prospective investors to choice sites along the river. In mid-March Bartram delivered the journal to the governor and departed for Philadelphia. The journal was sent to London and incorporated into the second edition of Dr. William Stork's A Description of East-Florida, with a Journal Kept by John Bartram of Philadelphia, Botanist to His Majesty for the Floridas; upon A Journey from St. Augustine up the River to St. John's as far as the Lakes that was published by the Board of Trade and Plantations in 1766. Bartram's travel journal was widely read in Britain and helped fan the flames of "Florida Fever" that prompted numerous British aristocrats and merchants to acquire tracts of land in East Florida.

His careful measurements of the depth and composition of soil strata, along with practical observations of East Florida's rivers and creeks, wetlands and savannahs, and oak and pine forests effectively encouraged future British settlements in the new colony. "As the King's Botanist in the colonies," Thomas P. Slaughter has written, "his job was to be of use to the Empire, to discover curious plants and provide information that would help extract value from the American possessions." William Bartram returned to East Florida on his own in March 1774 to conduct another investigation of the St. Johns River. For eight months he traveled in a small sailboat up and down the same waterway he and his father had explored in 1765-66, adding horseback journeys to Seminole Indian villages in what are now Alachua and Leon counties as well. William Bartram's journey was financed by Dr.

John Fothergill, a wealthy English physician and naturalist, who received in return plant specimens and sketches of birds, fish, flowers, and plants, and an important manuscript that is still utilized by scholars: "Travels in Georgia and Florida, 1223-24: A Report to Dr. John Fothergill." After leaving East Florida in November 1774, Bartram continued his naturalist's pilgrimage throughout the southeastern colonies of British North America. He did not return to his family home near Philadelphia until January 1777. By then, Pennsylvanians and other North American colonials were engaged in a bitter war for independence. The Bartrams' former patrons in London had become the enemy. Like his father, William Bartram recorded his observations in a journal.

After reuniting with his parents in 1777, Bartram lived and worked for the rest of his life at his father's farm outside Philadelphia, and transformed his travel journals and memories into a narrative that was finally published in Philadelphia in 1791 as Travels Through North and South Carolina, Georgia, East and West Florida, the Cherokee Country, the Extensive Territories of the Muscogulgees, or Creek Confederacy, and the Country of the Chactaws. The book is still in print, in several editions. “Little green Bittern, a pretty bird,” is the title William Bartram chose for this drawing. He also called it a “Green Heron.” Courtesy of the Natural History Museum, London. The webpage that follows is intended as a travel guide to East Florida's most important waterway as it appeared in 1765-1766 before the natural terrain was transformed by Europeans. John Bartram was the first person to systematically explore the St. Johns River and leave a written record of his observations. European plantation development had just begun when Bartram wrote his journal. Only a handful of settlements could be found in the lower valley of the river.

Spanish colonists from 1565 to 1763 had done little to alter the natural setting, and the hand of Florida's Native Americans had passed only lightly over the river's shores. The ceremonial mounds and burial middens that rose along the shores fascinated the Bartrams and were frequent subjects of their journal entries. But the mounds were widely scattered over a vast terrain, and the nearby ruins of "old fields" where Florida's indigenous Indians had once harvested corn and other provisions covered only fifty to one hundred acres at each site. Soon after the British planters and their enslaved Africans arrived, however, the forests were cleared, marshes were drained, fields were cultivated, and the face of the river valley changed forever. It was the British who brought the plantation era to Florida; Spanish and American successors merely expanded the extent of developed land. Subsequent forms of economic development, whether mills, power plants, factories, or recreational and residential communities, only accelerated and elaborated the transformation. The real value of the Bartrams’ observations, therefore, is that they open windows on the St. Johns River before European plantation development occurred.

Through John's journal and William's literary musings and drawings, viewers can capture the essence of the St. Johns River valley in its natural setting. Viewers are invited to follow in the wake of the Bartrams' battoe, a large "dugout" canoe shaped from a cypress log, that carried them on an epic 500-mile journey of discovery on the St. Johns River between December 19, 1765, and February 13, 1766. The core of the river tour is the journal John Bartram wrote in March 1766 that was published in William Stork's A Description of East-Florida. It benefits from the reliable work of Francis Harper, who edited that journal and published it as John Bartram, "Diary of a Journey through the Carolinas, Georgia, and Florida, from July 1, 1765, to April 10, 1766", Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, n.s., Vol. XXXIII, Pt. I. Philadelphia, 1942. The St.

Johns River tour begins December 20, 1765, at the place Bartram launched his famous journey, Beauclerc Bluff Plantation. That location is marked on a map of the St. Johns River valley and keyed to the date of the diary entry John recorded there. Each subsequent campsite is similarly marked on the map, and linked to a text file containing a transcription of that day's journal entry, followed by commentary and corresponding maps and photographs. Excerpts from William Bartram's writings in Travels and in "Travels in Georgia and Florida, 1773-74: A Report to Dr. John Fothergill" are paired with his father’s remarks from the 1765-66 expedition. The writing styles of the two men differ greatly. John's prose is brief and to-the-point, a scientist reporting on the soil and terrain. William's musings are the product of a natural philosopher contemplating God, man, and beauty in the exotic state of nature that Florida represented in his romantic imagination. For many generations Travels has been considered a literary and artistic masterpiece by readers throughout the world.

Examples of William Bartram's considerable talent as a nature artist are also linked to the journal entries to coincide with locations where either the father or the son observed a particular plant, bird, fish, or flower. Viewers should note that when Bartram indicates the Battoe traveled "upriver," or when he refers to a site as "above," he means the direction is generally to the south; correspondingly, when reference is made to "downriver" or "below," the direction is to the north. The St. Johns is one of the few major rivers in the world that runs to the north. Bibliography of sources consulted. Bill Belleville, River of Lakes: A Journey on Florida's St. Johns River (Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press, 2000). Edmund and Dorothy Smith Berkeley, editors, The Corresondence of John Bartram, 1734-1777 (Gainesville, FL: University Presses of Florida, 1992). Edmund and Dorothy Smith Berkeley, The Life and Travels of John Bartram: From Lake Ontario to the River St.

John (Tallahassee, FL: University Presses of Florida, 1990). Edward Cashin, William Bartram and the American Revolution on the Southern Frontier (Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 2000). Joseph Ewan, William Bartram: Botanical and Zoological Drawings, 1756-1788 (Philadelphia, PA: Memoirs of the American Philosophical Society, Volume 74, 1968). Francis Harper, editor, John Bartram, Diary of a Journey through the Carolinas, Georgia, and Florida, from July 1, 1765, to April 10, 1766, Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, n.s., Vol. XXXIII, Pt. I. Philadelphia, PA, 1942. Francis Harper, The Travels of William Bartram: Naturalist's Edition (Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press, 1998. Reprint of the Yale University Press 1958 edition). Thomas P. Slaughter, The Natures of John and William Bartram (New York, NY: Alfred A.

Knopf, Inc., 1996). Thomas P. Slaughter, William Bartram: Travels and Other Writings (New York, NY: The Library of America, 1996). Gregory A. Waselkov and Kathryn E. Holland Braund, editors, William Bartram on the Southeastern Indians (Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1995).

Question: Spain ceded Florida to Britain in the 1763 Treaty of Paris which ended which war? (The name by which it is known in Britain is required)
Answer: Seven Years’ War